London’s thirteen Inner boroughs approved a total of 11,970 new homes in H1 2015, while all twenty Outer London boroughs allowed just 7,960 new homes in the same period.
This means Inner London is granting permission for 50% more homes in absolute terms than the whole of Outer London – despite representing a considerably smaller land area, numbering fewer individual boroughs, and already hosting the highest densities of existing development.
Andrew Bridges, managing director of Stirling Ackroyd, commented:
“Half of this harrowing story is good news. As London re-emerges from the industrial decline, dwindling population and hollowing retreat of the 20th century, the heart of this world city is beginning to beat quicker again. Densely packed hubs of jobs and ideas in Inner London are building the core of our capital’s future economy. Creative professionals want to live in these vibrant communities on the doorstep of the dynamism that makes London the capital of the cultural world. So more homes here bring the future a little closer – and there is plenty of space for even more homes in central sites across Inner London.
“Yet the reluctance to keep up from so many suburban boroughs is still a restraint on London’s success and a stopper on the progress of people’s lives. If Outer London refuses to dance to the same tune, the capital’s overall house building targets may be pushed further into the realm of political imagination.”
Leading the capital’s drive for new homes are the Inner London boroughs of Tower Hamlets and Greenwich, which gave the go-ahead for 3,029 and 2,794 new homes respectively in the first half of 2015. Even the notoriously business-focused City of London approved 164 new residential homes – representing 100% of applications in the City itself.
By comparison, Richmond-upon-Thames approved 52 new homes over the same six-month period, the lowest of any borough. Similarly, Kingston only granted 75 home approvals, with Hillingdon and Bexley also consenting to fewer than 100 new homes.
Outer London authorities also refused a total of 4,160 potential new homes during the first half of 2015, or more than a third (34%) of applications in these boroughs. By contrast, in the same six months Inner London refused to give permission for just 970 potential new homes, or a rejection rate of just 8% of all homes applied for in Inner London over the period.
On this basis, proposed new homes are more than four times (4.56 times) more likely to be rejected by planning authorities in Outer London than in Inner London. Greenwich, Tower Hamlets, Camden, Southwark, Westminster and Hammersmith & Fulham are all rejecting less than 1-in-10 potential homes.
Andrew Bridges continued:
“Sometimes proposed developments just aren’t appropriate, either in terms of softer community concerns or the harder economic interests of a local area. Local authorities have an important role in judging proposals on behalf of residents and communities, and simply waving through every single scheme without modification would be an extreme approach.
“But rejecting an extreme proportion of possible homes is also a hugely controversial approach. Local authorities should think about future and potential residents as much as they consider the past. Planning applications need to be judged against a plan – which means having a plan in the first place, to supply enough places for people to live.
“We simply can’t afford to lose so many new homes every year to the jaws of grey filing cabinets lurking in dark council archives. London’s suburban resistance is damaging the prospects of an entire generation, and it will come to define the looming Mayoral election. Housing can no longer be a soundbite – it must become a reality.
“London has potential. Last year we identified enough room for 500,000 new homes across Greater London, which would cover supply for a decade. If that is to become reality, this open, liberal and global city needs to develop an open mind to development and the dramatic benefits it can bring.”
